Overview
The government sometimes enacts laws that may infringe upon the rights of individuals. While typically we do not want this kind of discrimination to happen to anyone, sometimes that law is related to a legitimate interest of the state. In Week 3, we addressed the different standards of review. Here, we will explore the rational basis test in more detail.
1. Review
Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982)
City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc., 473 U.S. 432 (1985)
Kadrmas v. Dickinson Pub. Schools, 487 US 450 (1988)
2. Why did each of these cases use the rational basis standard? Explain the Court's reasoning in each case. Did any of the cases cite and/or discuss the other cases as it analyzed the rational basis test application? Did the Court's reasoning change regarding the issues presented?
a. Do the local government's interests in Cleburne seem rationally related to its decision to deny a permit for a home for the mentally retarded? Were the community's concerns and fears truly legitimate interests?
b. In Plyler, why didn't the Court defer to Texas in its interest in discouraging illegal immigration?
c. Why was the outcome in Kadrmas different than in Plyler?
3. Is this test the best approach in trying to balance individual freedoms and government interests? Do any of the laws in these cases meaningfully advance the government's goals?
4. Why do you agree (or disagree) with the holdings in each case? Remember to support your answers and give attribution to your sources.